ORDER

SHASHI NARANG (MEMBER_

1. Brief facts of the present complaint are that complainant is running Rimzim restaurant at Sultanpur Lodhi to earn his livelihood and electric connection bearing NO.GC15/0014 is installed in the premises of the restaurant and the complainant has been paying the electricity bills regularly . As such the complainant is consumer of the opposite parties under section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has assailed the memo NO. 1912 dated 15/12/09 for Rs.3,00,837/- was

-2-

found recoverable by the opposite party No.2 His version is that demand raised by the opposite parties on account of alleged tampering of seals of the meter is arbitrary, illegal, and has caused mental tension and harassment to the complainant.

As the removed meter was never packed and sealed rather his signatures were obtained in the ME Lab on the pretext that removed meter is to be submitted with the ME Lab

2. Opposite party Board in its defence has pleaded that at the time of checking of remises of the complainant by the SDO alongwith JE on 22/10/09 in the presence of the complainant and both M & T seals were found to be suspicious. Accordingly meter was changed vide MCO No.083/81785 dated 22/10/09 Ex.R7 and same was sent to the ME Lab, Jalandhar vide challan NO.63 for its testing. The old removed meter of the complainant was chekced in the presence of the complainant and found that complainant has tampered with M & T seals after opening the meter cover. Complainant thus disturbed the internal mechanism and was committing theft of energy. Complainant also signed the checking report vide Ex.C4 and thereafter demand of Rs.3,00,837/- was raised by opposite party NO.2 vide memo NO. 1912 dated 15/12/09 on the test result of the ME Lab Ex.R12 after completing all the usual formalities in accordance with the instructions of the department.

Both the parties adduced evidence by way of affidavits and documents and hear respective counsel.

The case to connect the complainant is that old meter of the complainant was replaced by some officials of the PSEB vide MCO No.83/81785 dated 22/10/09 Ex.R7 in view of checking of the premises of the complainant carried out by SDO and JE, Sultanpur Lodhi on 22/10/09 and it is alleged that removed meter was packed and sealed with the signatures of the complainant which was sent to the ME Lab

-3-

vide store challan No.63 dated 1/12/09 Ex.R11 and the complainant was asked by opposite party NO.2 vide memo No.1539 dated 23/10/09 and again vide memo No.1784 dated 19/11/09 followed by another memo No.1824 dated 26/11/09 to remain present in the ME Lab for checking the meter

As per the opposite parties, the old meter of the complainant was checked in the ME Lab by the concerned authorities in the presence of the complainant and found that complainant has tampered with both M & T seals and has disturbed the internal mechanism vide checking report Ex.R12. They recorded their observations in the checking register at Sr. No. 1014 dated 1/12/09 and the complainant also signed the said checking report of the ME Lab and also received copy of the same. Accordingly complainant was asked by the opposite party No.2 vide memo NO.1912 dated 15/12/09 to deposit amount as compensation of theft of energy as per LDHF formula and overhauled the account of the complainant for 12 months, whereas consumption data placed on the record by the opposite parties for the year 2008-09 vide Ex.R7, the consumption of 1720 units during the month of April, 2009 as compared to consumption for the months of May, 2009 to Aug.2009 is very much on the lower side when the summer season was on full swing. As such possibility of old meter of the complainant started eratic behaviour during April, 2009 cannot be ruled out, so it is not fair to charge complainant for presumptive priod of 12 months preceding before detection of theft.

We, therefore, quash memo No.1912 dated 15/12/09 Ex.R13 of the opposite parties with further direction to overhaul the account of the complainant w.e.f. April, 2009 to date of detection of theft of energy in view of asessment of electricity charges in case of theft of electrcity as per sub clause 2 referred to section 35 of the act as laid down in ara-3 Punjab govt. Faz. July 27, 2007 (SRVN 5.1929 SAKA). We

-4-

also direct opposite parties to adjust Rs.150500/- already deposited by the complainant in terms of the order of this Forum dated 24/12/09 as per instructions of the department of the opposite parties within one month from the receipt of copy of this order.

Let certified copies of order be supplied to the parties without delay and file be consigned to record room.

Announced : Gulshan Prashar Paramjit Singh

20.4.2010 Member President.